Let's Get Digital

What are the main issues at play blocking the digitalization of patient records in the United States? High cost to hospitals and private practices? Patient privacy? Insistence on maintaining a tradition of incomprehensible doctor handwriting?

Is this an issue that the government (federal or state) has jurisdiction to act on by insisting on the use of digital records? Or is it to be left to the discretion of private practice, or perhaps benevolent third parties.

McCain's VP

It was very clever for McCain to select Sarah Palin as the vice presidential candidate on his ticket. According to Economists for Obama:

Passing over Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Kay Bailey Hutchinson, women either too liberal or too smart to join a likely losing ticket, quick-draw Johnny went for a woman he's met only once (as far as I can work out from the press reports). So, in a profoundly cynical move, the man who claims to put "country first" in fact put national security, the economy and pretty much everything else last and picked Sarah Palin. He thinks she checks off two dumb communities in a way Lieberman, Ridge, Romney and the other has-beens who would actually accept the VP job cannot. Of course, to really check off women, they have to ignore the fact that she's rabidly pro-life, thinks global warming is still a questionable hypothesis and has no knowledge of international affairs.

Indeed, McCain assumes that he will be able to pick up a large chunk of young, female voters with his choice of VP. He thinks he will be able to capture groups of swing voters, or those that would have voted for Hillary but were unsure of Obama.

Our country is not that stupid. Everybody sees through this ploy and I am hoping that it has the adverse effect of hurting his campaign more than helping it.

Update: Tyler Cowen says that liberals should not fall into the trap of harping on Palin's lack of experience in the public arena. He says:

Most American voters do not themselves know much detail about foreign affairs and their vision of an experienced leader does not require such knowledge. Was it demanded from Reagan? Doesn't everyone agree that Cheney and Rumsfeld knew plenty? Rightly or wrongly, many American voters will view Palin's stint as mayor of small town, her background in sports, her role in a beauty contest (yes), her trials raising teenage children, and her decision to stick with her priinciples and have a Downs Syndrome baby as all very valuable and relevant forms of experience. The more the word "experience" is repeated, no matter what the context, the more it will hurt Obama. Palin needs to appear confident and capable on TV and in the debates, but her ticket is not going to lose votes if she cannot properly spell Kyrgyzstan or for that matter place it on a map.

Cowen has a point here. However, the fact that Palin was chosen as McCain's VP negates his criticism of Obama's experience. He cannot possibly continue to raise the experience argument against his opponent when he has selected someone like Palin for his team (apparently, someone who he has met only once!).

Also, Kevin Drum has a post here that brings together some information on Palin's views on some major campaign issues. Enjoy! Here is my favorite:

Joe Klein on taxes: Palin exploded her state's coffers by imposing a windfall profits tax on the oil companies...sort of — no, exactly — like the proposal Barack Obama has made and John McCain has attacked. Apparently, she also supported the Bridge to Nowhere, despite her disclaimer at today's event. So how does McCain explain putting a tax-raising porker on his ticket?

Update 2: Here is a Republican Alaskan State Senator and an Alaskan editorial (respectively) on Sarah Palin (both via Brad Delong)

McCain's choice catches politicians by surprise: State Senate President Lyda Green, from Palin's hometown of Wasilla, said she thought it was a joke.... "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" Green told the Anchorage Daily News. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"...

And the editorial...

No doubt about it. In fact, as the governor herself acknowledged in her acceptance speech, she never set out to be involved in public affairs. She has never publicly demonstrated the kind of interest, much less expertise, in federal issues and foreign affairs that should mark a candidate for the second-highest office in the land. Republicans rightfully have criticized the Democratic nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, for his lack of experience, but Palin is a neophyte in comparison; how will Republicans reconcile the criticism of Obama with the obligatory cheering for Palin? Or will everyone just be forced to drop the subject? That’s not a comforting possibility. Although no one has the perfect resume and experience isn't everything, it is an important quality to weigh. Palin, if elected vice president, would ascend to the presidency if anything should happen to McCain, who turned 72 today.

Here is Ezra Klein:

Karl Rove:

With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?

Interestingly, the Richmond Metropolitan Area is about twice the size of Alaska. And three years are more years than two.

More from Ezra Klein (on foreign policy!)

From a March 2007 interview:

ABM: We've lost a lot of Alaska's military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting?

Palin: I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe.

So in March 2007, Sarah Palin wasn't paying enough attention to Iraq in order to have a particular opinion on the surge, or whether the administration's definition of "success" constituted a viable exit strategy. Meanwhile, McCain's whole campaign is predicated on the primacy of Iraq and the War on Terror -- the "transcendantal" nature of the threat that should overwhelm most all other considerations Which gets to the weird thing about the Palin pick.

There's plenty more, but I think I'll leave it at that for now.

Inconsistency

Just watched Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention. First off, I thought it was a terrific speech. Obama is clearly a gifted orator and had the crowd generally in tears. This is something we rarely saw with Kerry or Gore before him.

Secondly, it amuses me how pundits, immediately following the address, put forth the critique that it felt more like a "laundry list" than a memorable and historical landmark in speeches the likes of Kennedy's "New Frontier." So, critics first accused Obama of being too good an orator, too abstract, and riddling his speeches with platitudes and lofty ideals, neglecting policy details. Now, they say he has a "laundry list" and offers no lofty or memorable catch phrases.

I think I smell desperation...

The Charge of the Light Brigade

It seems that Russia might have other places to uphold its national's rights. Could we see military action ahead of the 2017 lease ending the Russian navy's base at Sevastopol? Is it right to assume that this date marks a 'deadline' for Russia to repeat Georgia in by lobbing the Crimea off of Ukraine or that any action along the same lines is inevitable for that matter? What about Moldova and Transnistria?

Round 2?

How hard would a Concert of Democracies rock out?

Probably pretty hard. But no one would agree on who to hire for security (who cracks fewer heads, Blackwater or Hells Angels?) or how much the tickets would be all the while the UN posts a noise ordinance that all the 'bands' are willing to pay the fine for.

Troop Withdrawl

Yglesias points us here:

The Iraqi government has said it is proposing U.S. troops end patrols of Iraqi towns and villages by the middle of next year and U.S. combat troops leave Iraq by 2011.

But Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a visit to Baghdad last week that no final agreement had been reached. The Bush administration has sought to steer clear of fixed timetables in negotiating the agreement.

Is there still any argument to whether Maliki really wants us gone?

More Policy Details!

I agree with Matthew Yglesias here:

Joe Klein visited a focus group:

“Change” as a theme is over. Too vague. And Obama’s rhetoric has begun to seriously cut against him. “No more oratory,” one woman said. “Give us details.”

I always wonder about this stuff. I mean, it’s inconceivable to me that this woman is genuinely yearning to learn more about the details of Obama’s policy agenda. If she actually wanted to know, she could, you know, look into it. She could learn all about the differences between auctioning emissions permits and giving them away, about the implications of having the federal government provide reinsurance for catastrophic medical expenses, about the case for a permanent R&D tax credit, etc., etc. But all indications are that most people find politics boring, and policy details duller still. And swing voters, which is what this was a focus group of, are least interested of all.

My guess is that people’s self-reports in these kind of situations are almost valueless. People want to express opinions that they think will be validated by others. The idea that Obama isn’t specific enough is both widespread and sounds high-minded, so it’s something that people looking to say something bad about him say even though I don’t see any evidence that his speeches are less specific than anyone else’s.

Absolutely true. If someone actually cared to go and discover more in-depth policy details of a particular candidate, the information is certainly available! For example, I rarely actually watch Obama or McCain speak on TV, and yet I consider myself more than adequately informed about the details of their economic policies. This does seem like an instance of searching for negative qualities in Obama. It is just like when he first announced his candidacy. Recall that most pundits accused him of not having enough experience to fill the role of the presidency. This was the biggest concern. Also note how we don't seem to hear this argument much anymore.

Also, I acknowledge that Obama has a tendency to offer platitudes and speak in the abstract, but certainly no moreso than his opponent.

Another Morning Coffee with Brad Delong - Health Care Edition

Another great post from Brad Delong. He discusses the current health care crisis, the presidential nominees' proposed solutions, and his critique. Watch the video and read along!

New Superman Film

Apparently, the Superman film franchise is getting a reboot, similar to that of the Batman franchise with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Or at least that's according to this new IGN article, which provides a detailed outline of ideas and suggestions for the possible plots, characters, etc. for the upcoming film.

I pretty much agree with most of the opinions in this feature. Certainly the franchise does need some fixing. I know that die-hard Richard Donner, 70s Superman fans will riot and revolt, but it's true. This is not only evident by the lack of financial success of Superman Returns, but also from the lack of any original story. Don't get me wrong -- Superman Returns was better than most of the superhero films I see today (I am of the minority opinion that all three Spiderman movies were atrocious, and that the first two Bryan Singer X-Men movies were, at best, satisfactory). However, it was far from a good Superman movie.

There were several problems with it, which I won't go into in detail, but I'll outline briefly here:
1) Casting. I agree with IGN that Brandon Routh did a decent job at playing Clark Kent, but was not believable as Superman. Yes, he did an adequate job of mimicking Christopher Reeve, but is that really what we want in a new Superman film? In addition, good actor or not, he is plain and simply too young, too soft, and not physically "big" enough. We are talking about Superman here. Many would claim the first modern superhero, an icon of American culture. We're talking about the guy who fought in the Cold War, the man who is strong and confident enough to fight not just Lex Luthor, but villains such as Brainiac, Darkseid, Metallo, and so on. We are talking about someone who is so familiar in American culture (and I'm sure other ones as well) that just taking one glance at the fabled "S" or one look at his face should conjure up immediate. Is this really a job for Routh? I think we need someone older, stronger, and who can do the job of playing the dual personality.

Kate Bosworth is another problem. Plain and simple, I just did not buy her as Lois Lane. Not for one second. The sassy, witty, smart, cosmopolitan reporter that every day poses more of a challenge for Clark/Superman than do his enemies. I don't see it.

2) Villains. As IGN notes, Lex Luthor is a crucial part of the Superman mythos. He must be present in a Superman story, especially if the filmmakers plan on retelling his origin (or his early years in Metropolis). We can't have a film without him. However, we can certainly make him more real. Donner's Luthor was certainly entertaining and was certainly evil (they made this really clear), but aren't we all sick of seeing the same movie Luthor re-hashed over and over? Again pulling from IGN:

The real Luthor thinks of himself as the ultimate hero. He's a world-renowned inventor and businessman. He basks in his status as Metropolis' favorite son, at least until Superman arrives to steal his spotlight. Luthor clashes with Superman because he firmly believes the alien hero is a detriment to humanity. Sure, Luthor is deluding himself when he claims he could save the world if only Superman didn't constantly get in the way, but that's the whole point. Luthor is a complex villain, and he needs to be portrayed as such.

We don't need another of the same, contrived plot by Luthor. We don't need to see him try to create his own continent or take over the world in some convoluted way. I also don't like to see him portrayed as some wacky and eccentric criminal constantly on the run from prison. No, I want the Luthor that works from the inside. I want the owner of Lexcorp, I want the Luthor that most people in Metropolis are stupid enough to trust. I want the Luthor that runs (and gets elected!) for president of the United States. This is a REAL challenge to Superman. Someone who rivals him for public respect.

That being said, I am also sick of Luthor. Period. Aside from him being Superman's antithesis in the DC Universe, one of the reasons that a better villain was not portrayed in past Superman films was because technology would not allow it. Now that technology has caught up with us and Luthor has been portrayed numerous times, I think it's time to bring in one of Kal-El's other notable villains. I think it's time for Brainiac! Especially, if the filmmakers plan to tackle some sort of origin story, showing Brainiac attacking Krypton and stealing the city of Kandor would be a great addition. Another great IGN suggestion: maybe even end the film with the appearance of Darkseid.

Those are just two of the many faults that can be remedied with a Superman reboot and I have every confidence that DC (and even Singer) can get it right in the future.

Comic Book Characters Revert to the Mean

Brian Cronin says that comic book characters tend to revert to the mean. By this, he means:

This is one of the more obvious theories, but my pal Dan Larkin said I should write it up, so here it is! In serialized comics, given enough time, comics will eventually regress to the mean. The “mean” in this instance is defined as what the average comic book writer has identified as the classic take on that particular character.

This doesn’t mean that characters don’t grow as characters, just that their circumstances/status quos tend to eventually regress to the mean.

You can have Julia Carpenter have an extended run as Spider Woman. You can even have a brand new character like Mattie Franklin get her own book as Spider Woman. Eventually, though, Spider Woman will be Jessica Drew once again, as Jessica Drew as Spider Woman is the “mean.

While I agree that character mythologies tend to stay the same with comic book characters (which is a pretty obvious argument indeed), I don't think that characters necessarily revert to the mean. Primarily because I think there isn't a mean. A few things:
1) Cronin has to be careful with his definition of "mean." He says that it's what the "average comic book writer has identified as the classic take on that particular character." I think the problem here is the phrase "classic take." Bill Finger's take on Batman is a classic take, yet Frank Miller's 1986 take on Batman is also now considered both classic and seminal. Yet, they are very different takes. An "average" writer today can subscribe to either one, neither of which is an incorrect take.
2) I think the fact that there are such different takes on a character makes his argument a big weaker. The fact that many people identify with a darker, grittier Batman while simultaneously acknowledging a lighter, less insane one is evidence that characters change and can be interpreted in different ways. The key is that the core mythology has to remain intact. Cronin even acknowledges that characters change. He even acknowledges that they change dramatically (Dick Grayson becomes Nightwing). So, I'm left a little uncertain as to what he's looking for. Either the character changes (which we just proved happens) or the core mythology of the character changes, which would essentially imply that it would not be the same character. You can't do this as a writer. This is why I too suspect that Captain America will be back and that Bruce Wayne will eventually return as Batman following Morrison's RIP arc. But this doesn't have to do with "reverting" to the mean--it has to do with telling the story of the same character.

Any thoughts?

Odd Legal Precautions

It is, I am informed on the warning label, a violation of federal law to use my new bottle of Fantastik™ brand heavy-duty kitchen cleaner "in a manner inconsistent with these directions." Really?! So if I don't shake well before use, or I use on porous materials, I'm violating federal law? I've started noticing this little tagline on lots and lots of labels for lots and lots of products (I'm something of a compulsive label-reader) -- does anyone know what federal law they're talking about?

That's from The Volokh Conspiracy. One of the most interesting legal precautions that I have read about recently via the folks at Freakonomics is a curious little itunes:

From the department of curious legal precautions: Apple’s iTunes licensing agreement — which you have already agreed to if you’ve installed the latest version of the popular music software — contains a clause which prohibits anyone from using the program …

… for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture, or production of nuclear missiles or chemical or biological weapons.

So Apple has got the WMD angle covered. But say you’re interested in using iTunes to run your new nuclear reactor?

Not so fast. A separate version of the iTunes license agreement warns that:

The Apple software is not intended for use in the operation of nuclear facilities, aircraft navigation or communication systems, life support machines, or other equipment in which the failure of the Apple software could lead to death, personal injury, or severe physical or environmental damage.

It turns out that this “nuclear clause” shows up in all sorts of unlikely places, from virus scanners to desktop weather readers.

Is this language as useful as a no-parking sign in front of a broken fire hydrant? Or do software lawyers know something we don’t about what our computers are capable of?

The Controversy over McCain's Homes

I am sure this is old news already, but the internet is brewing with commentary regarding the number of homes that John McCain owns. Evidently, it is such a large number that even he cannot recall.

Here is Yglesias considering the possibilities:

I’ve seen a lot of liberals giving John McCain a hard time about not knowing how many homes he owns. But this is a genuinely difficult question to answer! There’s the case of his two-for-one condo in Phoenix, for example. And there’s also the tricky question of McCain “Hidden Valley Ranch” house situation. The Cindy Hensley McCain Family Trust owns 11455 E Hidden Valley Road, 11445 E Hidden Valley Road, 11415 E Hidden Valley Road, and 11405 E Hidden Valley Road. But is that four properties or is it one property? What’s more, according to McCain there are six houses on the property. So that ranch situation could be anywhere from six houses to one house, depending on how you look at it. Combined with the condo situation, we’re now in the 2-7 house range.

UPDATE: And of course you have to consider the case of Meghan McCain’s loft in Phoenix. Her parents paid $700,000 for it and as a graduation present let her live there, but technically they’re the owners. Does that count as one of McCain’s houses or doesn’t it?

I think he eventually ends up counting five. This, of course, does not count his various ranch properties as different homes, nor does it count his loft in Phoenix or Meghan McCain's loft.

Does Cursing Exist?

Matthew Yglesias poses a question:

Do people really say “frickin’”? I’ve always been a believer in the view that one should either curse, or else one should not curse. These gosh darn stand-in profanity terms are just silly.

I entirely agree, except for the "not curse" part. I think that people should have no qualms about it and sometimes wonder when and how the concept of "cursing" even came into being. Most cursing is just an expression of anger (or some sort of extreme emotion), and telling people not to use said words is in effect telling them to repress those emotions. And, of course, telling people that using sweeter-soundinig (are they even sweeter sounding?) euphemisms (are they even really euphemisms?) such as "frickin" or "heck" to project a certain extreme emotion in place of another completely arbitrary word seems nonsensical.

What do you folks think?

More on the Disintegration of Civil Liberties

Via Mark Thoma:

I'm with libertarians on this one, this goes too far. I didn't think Americans would ever put up with the kinds of invasions of privacy that we've allowed in the name of preventing terrorism, but I was wrong:

Police to Track All Vehicles into New York City, by David Theroux: The New York City Police Department is now planning on tracking the movements of all vehicles entering Manhattan in a federally funded program designated “Operation Sentinel.” Of course, this massive assault on privacy is being done to track and screen out “terrorism.” And according to the Associated Press:

Police say Operation Sentinel would rely on license-plate readers, radiation detectors and closed-circuit cameras installed at the 16 bridges and four tunnels serving Manhattan. About a million vehicles drive onto the island every day. The vehicle data would be analyzed by computers programmed with information about suspicious vehicles...

....New York City police are admitting that since they neither know who are actual terrorists or how to find them, everyone is a criminal suspect and will be monitored in the stereotypical bureaucratic belief that extracting information on everyone will somehow solve the problem. But, don’t worry:

Police say law-abiding people have nothing to fear: Vehicle data deemed innocent would be purged after 30 days.

Translation: spying, collecting files, and then keeping the information on permanent record is entirely at the discretion of the police bureaucracy. In all:

The plan calls for 116 stationary and mobile license-plate readers and 3,000 closed-circuit cameras that would be monitored by officers at a command center.

"Operation Sentinel" huh? You know where else the word "sentinel" pops up a lot? In X-Men comics! These guys, remember? The ones that are programmed to hunt and kill mutants.

I am speechless...

More Posts Soon...

...we promise!

Tip of the hat, Cowen-san

Marginal Revolution has been going crazy over many things Japanese the past couple of days--it makes me smile.

A great link to a story on the prominence of yakuza in modern Japan--and it is such a casual thing to acknowledge and talk about here. The mythos around the 'gangster' is eaten up here in the form of books, toys and of course movies. I wonder if The Yamadas is in the works--probably set around where I live... again.

Another interesting link to an article on why those Incredibles look so incredible--originally postulated by a Japanese robotics researcher.

Cowen most recently lists his all time favorite Japanese movies.

I agree with the favorites list for the most part. Ikiru is absolutely gorgeous and Dreams is definitely looked over too casually. Ozu's Tokyo Story and Mizoguchi's Ugetsu are obvious choices on any list, ones that I agree with. Once seeing them you'll see why. And of course you can't escape the anime, for which anything Miyazaki is not trite nor displeasing. Graveyard of the Fireflies is one of the heart-rending films that I've ever seen, animated or not.

Whether it has been uncalled for pretension or just an aversion to blood, guts an horror I've stayed away from films like Zatoichi, Battle Royale and Audition and have yet to see them--much to the disappointment of my ultra-violence loyal friends.

Next stop: Audition town.

Some News..

Here's something fun:

Sen. John McCain promises that, as president, he would “cut taxes and balance the budget.” But his current economic plan would create deficits as deep as 5.7% of GDP by the end of a two term presidency — the highest federal budget deficit in 25 years — and would accumulate the biggest debt since the second World War, according to a new analysis by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. McCain’s current fiscal plan would recklessly exacerbate the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush Administration further by gutting revenues far below the average level of the past 25 years.

Oh, and how about this?

The Bush administration improperly issued a policy directive last year that restricts states' abilities to expand their SCHIP programs, the Government Accountability Office and the Congressional Research Service said on Thursday during a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing, CQ Today reports. The Aug. 17, 2007, policy directive requires states to enroll 95% of children in families with incomes up to 200% of the federal poverty level before expanding coverage to children in families with incomes greater than 250% of the poverty level.

One of the best eateries I have been to in a while..

...it's called "From Scratch." It has delicious soups, salads, sandwiches, sides and more. It's quaint and the sandwiches in particular are amongst some of the most creative I have seen of similar cafe/contemporary American restuaurants (e.g. Panera, Cosi, etc.). I recommend the prime rib French dip.

A Clinton-Obama Deal?

Hillary Clinton's big win tonight in the West Virginia primary will probably, in restrospect, do little to increase her chances of winning the Democratic nomination for presidency (though I have no doubt, many spectators will disagree). Indeed, since Barack Obama's major win in North Carolina, coupled with his already significant lead in the popular votes and delegate count, most have been predicting that the general election will be a contest between Obama and John McCain. The two had even started planning their fall strategies.

However, if West Virginia demonstrates anything, it is that Clinton still has the capability of winning swing states and voters--much like her earlier victories in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama needs these to win against McCain in the fall, and many are beginning to suspect that he is likely to lose those that would have otherwise supported Clinton to a Republican vote.

The New York Times posed an interesting question today:

Mr. Obama needs her to help him win in the fall. Her devoted contingent of Democrats is nearly as large as his own, a point that will be underscored with her expected big win tonight in West Virginia. After a divisive primary season, he knows that winning over her supporters begins with winning over her.

So how about this: What if Mrs. Clinton asked Mr. Obama to adopt her plan for universal health care? He could put Mrs. Clinton in charge of achieving it, presumably but not necessarily from her perch inside the Senate. And he could begin by putting the goal of universal coverage as a plank in the party’s platform.

As the Times notes, this is purely speculative. However, it's still an interesting thought. Many might think that it is politically infeasible (which it probably is--I maintain my position that Obama will want nothing to do with Clinton if she drops from the race) or not particularly saavy on the part of Obama. I, however, think that such a "deal" might actually be a positive. In my view, Clinton's universal health plan--one which includes an individual mandate for the entire population--as opposed to Obama's, which only imposes one for children first, is a more efficient means towards an effective health care system. If Obama were to allow Clinton to run her health plan as part of his campaign in exchange for her voters' support, imagine the symbolic stimulus that the country could receive. Although there is an element of selfishness to it, the deal would still mark a cooperative agreement between Democrats--something that we have been lacking in the election so far. Imagine Democrats working together for the good of the nation. Plus, a higher propsect of beating out McCain in the fall.

I don't think this is so bad...

Schola Rasa

Is this something that needs to happen in New Jersey?

A hurricane that takes lives, destroys property and decimates the public school system?
Definitely not.

A clean break from the quagmire of poorly performing school districts all across the state followed by a fresh start?
Most certainly.

I'm not sure that charter schools with independent school boards are the answer, but with test scores that are at a vast discrepancy with education 'capitalization' (the Newark school system has the highest spending per student in the nation at more than $20,000 each while maintaining some of the worst scores) something has to be done.

What do you think is the best solution? Instituting charter schools? Increasing standards for hiring teachers? Breaking the teacher's unions? Eliminating tenure (one of my favorites)?

Simply put--What can be done to increase the quality of education in New Jersey?

Blowing Bubbles

Like mispronouncing the word indemnity and premature ejaculations, so too is the 'oil bubble' a self fulfilling prophecy when too much trouble is put into pointing it out.

While speculators and growing participation it the futures market are undoubtedly going to raise the cost per barrel, here Krugman does well to point out that the market function of price has seen significant increases to stem vastly increasing demand--not the nasty guys at OPEC or those 10 stock traders standing around the water cooler devising a plan to make us all pay more at the pump out of sheer amusement.

Here's a newsflash: OIL IS A SCARCE RESOURCE!

And its much more scarce and harder to find and extract then we (don't really) care to know. So, go buy a Prius or a new Schwinn.

Pirates FTW!

This is a book that I will be buying. Yargh!

Link courtesy of MR.

And by the way, long time no see.

Heists Still Exist..and Speaking of Cowboys

I have to say that this is pretty cool (especially since no one was hurt).

Quick Recommendation: I just saw "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" last week and it was fantastic, watch it! Brad Pitt plays a pretty cool Jesse James but Casey Affleck's performance as Robert Ford steals the show--I found myself at every scene wincing with embarrassment for his character. The soundtrack (Nick Cave & Warren Ellis) builds the high-tension of the film while ever tightening the knot in your stomach until (not giving away much here) the death of Jesse James.

Death by Blogging

Is blogging one of the most stressful jobs?

Two weeks ago in North Lauderdale, Fla., funeral services were held for Russell Shaw, a prolific blogger on technology subjects who died at 60 of a heart attack. In December, another tech blogger, Marc Orchant, died at 50 of a massive coronary. A third, Om Malik, 41, survived a heart attack in December.

Other bloggers complain of weight loss or gain, sleep disorders, exhaustion and other maladies born of the nonstop strain of producing for a news and information cycle that is as always-on as the Internet.

To be sure, there is no official diagnosis of death by blogging, and the premature demise of two people obviously does not qualify as an epidemic. There is also no certainty that the stress of the work contributed to their deaths. But friends and family of the deceased, and fellow information workers, say those deaths have them thinking about the dangers of their work style.

The Colbert Bump

Forthcoming paper by political scientists at the University of California, dicussing the popularity gained by Democratic politicians appearing on The Colbert Report:

The results show that Democratic candidates who appear on the Report receive a statistically significant "Colbert Bump" in campaign contributions, raising 44% more money in a 30-day period after appearing on the show. However, there is no evidence of a similar boost for Republicans. These results constitute the first scientific evidence of Stephen Colbert's influence on political campaigns.

Via Crooked Timber.

Beijing

A sea of variant grays and uniform bright red. Beijing is perhaps the most oddly planned (?) city I have ever seen. It struck me as soon as the city limits became clear along the highway from the airport. Every couple of blocks there were pairs or triples of identical high rise developments. All new, all gray. Welcome signs for the upcoming 2008 Olympics peppered their sides like badges of reluctant courage. However, almost in spite of the high-end shops open to receive the new money that has arisen in the high rent districts, the large portrait of Mao hangs on the gate of the Forbidden City looking over the depressingly barren Tiananmen Square with pleasure. The monstrous administrative buildings of the CCP enclose the East and West Ends of the Square while the tomb of the Great Helmsman holds silent vigil over the South. I rarely saw the guards in their pale green uniforms around the ritzy shops, but they combed the Square with choreographed precision for everyone to see. These are two of the Beijings I saw during my short time there. And it might be cheeky, but I found it quite funny that Mao seems to be gazing right over the square at his own grave.

Education Gap

Freakonomics had an interesting quorum today on the issue of the education achievement gap. There were many interesting and innovative suggestions as to how we can bridge the (specifically) black-white racial disparity in U.S. education. Of course, the economist of the bunch suggested providing incentives for teachers who produce better outcomes amongst their students:

One thing we have learned definitively in recent years is that teachers differ in their ability to raise students’ achievement. Research shows that your child’s learning will be very different at the end of the school year if he has the best teacher in his grade rather than the worst teacher. Importantly, it is not a master’s degree, a teaching certificate, or experience that makes a teacher the best or the worst. The data show that some teachers are simply better at raising achievement and that their superior talents are not revealed by credentials that would show up on a resume. Since we can identify the better teachers ex post but not necessarily when they are hired, it makes sense to reward teachers based on their students’ learning gains.

If states introduced bonuses for teachers who raised achievement substantially and gave bigger bonuses to teachers who raised disadvantaged students’ achievement, considerable progress might be made in closing the achievement gap. Such a policy would not only give teachers strong incentives to improve their teaching, but it would also draw talented people into the teaching profession and keep them there.

I think that, given the recent research that correlates education success with gifted and motivated teachers, strengthening this group is a fascinating approach. However, I wonder what sort of incentives Professor Hoxby had in mind. Intuition tells me that most teachers, especially ones in inner-city schools and traditionally underserved areas often take up the profession for a variety of reasons, of which monetary reward is not amongst the top. Therefore, what sort of incentives would motivate teachers to perform better for their students? Also, as suggested in the Freakonomics book, would this sort of incentive cause more teachers to cheat (for more information, see the book: teachers' cheating methods include fabricating standardized testing scores, providing easier tests & quizzes for their students, or even giving them answers beforehand!)

Other suggestions in the quorum included various mechanisms for improving high school education to prepare students for post-secondary school (as opposed to lowering admissions and curriculum standards in colleges--something which I haven't actually seen happen much so far), investing in means to support impoverished children and families, improving pre-school study (a "head start" approach to education), and many more...

I think the question of how far back and how early an age to invest in quality education is an important one. For example, should we start by building on pre-schools and elementary schools or focus more on high school education? In addition, should we focus on recruiting better teachers into the profession, or is it more of a systemic problem that needs a massive overhaul?

What do you think?

Happiness is a Deal of the Cards

How much of happiness is genetic? Apparently, fifty percent, according to this study:

Psychologists at Edinburgh University found that inherited genes control up to half of the personality traits that keep us happy.

The group, working with researchers in Australia, studied nearly 1000 pairs of twins.

They built up a picture of each individual's personality by assessing factors such as how sociable and outgoing they were, or how anxious or angry they feel.

The group were able to identify evidence of common genes that result in certain personality traits, which in turn predispose people to happiness.

It is believed that those who inherit the right mix of personality genes build an "affective reserve" of happiness which can be called on in times of stress or act as a buffer when things go wrong.

Imagine that. A "reserve" of happiness that can be called upon in times of stress of crisis. I wonder if one day, scientists will be able to quantify this reserve so that human beings would, in effect, be able to keep track of how much "happiness stock" they have left. Sounds like an interesting premise for a science fiction movie.

Two things I can remark on about this. First, this officially gives credence to every time someone says that life "dealt me a crummy hand." I have a feeling that if studies like these become more legit, we'll be seeing more people bottom out. But this is thinking way into the long-run.

Of course, fifty percent of happiness being environmental has some deeper implications. It means that, despite a supposedly genetic component, knowing the right tricks to lead a happier life can probably hold a substantial influence over that other component. The article mentions that scientists are working to identify how behavior and positive psychology can influence happiness. So, don't fret all you sad ones.

Stop Thinking With Your Brain

Like most other men, I've been accused of thinking with parts of my body other than my brain but apparently there is some truth in the matter.

There are some fascinating implications for learning languages (what I keep myself busy with these days, both teaching and learning) through usage in real world examples. The article brings up the example of children learning their primary language by linking words to physical examples. This has been at work in various courses of foreign language learning which have students learning how to shop at the same time they learn the abstract idea of communicating their birthday.

The practicality of learning this type of lingual maneuvering early in language acquisition is important for its own sake of course, say if you find yourself in a sushi restaurant and want to impress your date by ordering in fluent Japanese (which could easily fall apart if asked whether you want your coffee before or after your meal...) However, this strategy for second language acquisition could prove to be leagues more effective than rote memorization of conjugation tables and declensions--a secret which is not lost on the more successful language courses.

And We're Back...With a Post about Graphic Novels

Sorry for the temporary hiatus, folks. T and I have been incredibly busy over the past few weeks with work, life, love, action, romance, and everything in between. We now return to your regularly scheduled blogging.

Should schools start using graphic novels in their English and literature classes? Well, technically, should they make alternative mediums a crucial part of the curriculum? The Newsarama blog linked to an interesting article about it. Here's the kicker: it's told in the form of a comic book! Clever, huh?

I think that treating graphic novels as literary sources, especially for children in early ages, is a great idea. Younger kids find it easier to associate words with images. Art Spiegelman, notable writer of the famous novel, Maus, has even begun putting out a line of comics for children, in an effort to help expand their English skills and take an interest in reading.

Of course, there are critics. From Newsarama's link:

The only one who should use a graphic novel in school might be K-2, to ensure competence and retention of the new language. Anyone beyond that grade should be reading progressively higher forms of English text. What will they all do when they have to read Legal and Medical journals; convert them into Graphic Novels; oh I forgot, we won’t be producing any Doctors or Lawyers or Engineers, because THEY CAN’T READ!

This makes no sense to me. Critics of education with graphic novels seem to all think that there would be some slippery slope that would eventually lead to the diminished use of classic literature and standard books. I don't think this will happen. And I don't even think the comment about doctors, lawyers and engineers warrants a response beyond this acknowledgement of its absurdity.

True, graphic novels have their limits--though they contain heavy exposition, narration, and dialogue, they do sacrifice a great deal of English grammar and punctuation, since dialogues appear in thought bubbles. Of course, the same can be said about many forms of literature that do not come delivered in the typical book package. Take plays, for instance, which focus more on dialogues and monologues, than exposition.

All in all, I'm in favor of trying the graphic novel approach as a supplement to the classics and standards. Sure, there will be the conservative critics fearful of the year-3000, experimental approaches, but we have no substantial reason to suspect that graphic novels are any worse a medium than others.

Russia

Quite fitting that the BBC posted two articles about Russia indicative that Russia is bound for more of same rather than possible change.

While the now elected Medvedev was portrayed as the man to steer clear of the hard handed Kremlin-Konsensus under the rule of one man, his victory speech was littered with outright statements of keeping in line with Putin's policy directives. To that end, he is quoted as saying that he will work in an "effective tandem" with Putin as his soon to be appointed Prime Minister.

Onward Russia, Inc.

Comic Book Sales Data

Here's something interesting. A new monthly feature that analyzes historical market trends in comic book sales. At first glance, the historical analyses (five-year and ten-year) don't seem all that informative, as they seem to analyze orders and pre-orders rather than sales. They also compare final orders to pre-orders, so I wonder how reliable that is. Still, this is pretty cool.

Fun note: 30 Days of Night was the top-selling trade paperback of 2003.

Golf for the Homeless?

According to today's Times, less people are playing golf in the United States.

Over the past decade, the leisure activity most closely associated with corporate success in America has been in a kind of recession.

The total number of people who play has declined or remained flat each year since 2000, dropping to about 26 million from 30 million, according to the National Golf Foundation and the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association.

More troubling to golf boosters, the number of people who play 25 times a year or more fell to 4.6 million in 2005 from 6.9 million in 2000, a loss of about a third.

The industry now counts its core players as those who golf eight or more times a year. That number, too, has fallen, but more slowly: to 15 million in 2006 from 17.7 million in 2000, according to the National Golf Foundation.

If George Carlin was right in his famous bit, this is terrific news. According to him, golf is an "arrogant, elitist game that takes up entirely too much room in this country." I, myself, am a huge fan of hitting balls at my local driving range and I also couldn't be more fond of miniature golf. Intuitively, one would think that I would have a natural affinity towards golf. However, I find myself agreeing with Carlin. Even the Times notes that it is a "leisure activity" (notice how they did not say, "game") mostly associated with "corporate success."

Is Carlin's bit about sacrificing all the golf courses in America for the homeless, for prisons, and other projects that benefit the community that farfetched? There are approximately 23,000 golf courses and clubs in the United States! 23,000!

If we could suddenly demolish all of those, what would you do with all the room? Seriously.

The Delegates are Super

It looks like Obama is currently the front-runner of the Democratic campaign, but it also looks like the nominee might be decided by the "super-delegates" in August. Clinton supporters urge the delegates to vote according to their consciences. But, what does the public's wishes mean to a super delegate?

Oy. I hope they don't do anything that I wouldn't do!

Troops Gone Wild

How do people acquire perceptions and judgments about those of other cultures? Unfortunately many judge based on stereotypes, political propaganda or based on what they see through subtler but equally distorted channels like movies and TV shows. However, more striking and true toward forming ideas and learning about people of other cultures is through living and existing with them. It is always eye-opening and profound for anyone who experiences it. What happens though when the picture that is painted by a few of one group is not the one that the majority wants others to see?

The record of American troops committing rape, violence and destruction of property on the Japanese island of Okinawa is a blight on the perception that Americans should be giving abroad--especially with one of its closest allies. American troops have been stationed at Okinawa since the end of Second World War, protecting American interests in the Pacific while at the same time upholding the American-Japanese alliance. While possible hostilities with China represents a clear reason for military presence for some, the soldiers have had more of a symbolic and ambassadorial role since the end of the Cold War. It is unavoidable that those living in Okinawa and in Japan as a whole will look to these troops as representative of American values. But what what do they see?

In the most serious of recent cases, a Marine has been detained and questioned over the alleged rape of a 14-year-old Okinawan school girl. While he denies the charges of raping her, he admits that he tried to forcibly kiss her after he gave her a ride home.

Just today, a marine Corporal was arrested for breaking into the home of Okinawan woman and taking a drunk snooze. The arrest came after the woman discovered him passed out in her home this morning. The official charge is "trespassing".

It would be wrong to judge all American troops, let alone all the American troops in Okinawa as being drunken, sex-crazed party animals. That would be unfair. However, the repeated incidence of horrific crimes and complete irresponsibility by some soldiers can lead one to question the environment in which these soldiers operate that allows for these acts to continue. How can military policy be changed to stop troops from ravaging the locales where they are stationed? What perceptions do these soldiers and their commanders have of their local communities that makes them feel these actions are A) OK to commit and B) not serious enough to enact reforms to prevent? Finally, is this the image that America wants to give to the rest of the world? If the above impression is what one of America's greatest allies is getting from our overseas 'ambassadors', what is everyone else getting?

Pop Culture's Best Couples (Happy Belated Valentines Day!)

Here's a great list of pop culture's greatest fictional lovers. I love that Superman & Lois, Buffy & Angel, Han & Leia, and Rick & Ilsa are on there. Pam & Jim, Ron & Hermione, Carrie & Big are lame. I guess I'm just anti modern romances.

Informed Decisions

Freakonomics linked to this article today:

Doctors are adjusting their bedside manner as better informed patients make ever-increasing demands and expect to be listened to, and fully involved, in clinical decisions that directly affect their care. In a study just published in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Dr. J. Bohannon Mason of the Orthocarolina Hip and Knee Center in Charlotte, NC, USA, looks at the changes in society, the population and technology that are influencing the way patients view their orthopaedic surgeons. As patients gain knowledge, their attitude to medicine changes: They no longer show their doctors absolute and unquestionable respect.

Is this a blessing or a curse? On the one hand, developments in technology have produced more informed patients that do not blindly succumb to the will of their seemingly omnipotent physicians, and can use efficient internet tools in order to research information on signs, symptoms, diagnoses and procedures, statistics, risks, etc. On the other hand, these same factors have resulted in patients becoming more arrogant, disrespectful to doctors, and impetuous in selecting medical treatments. After all, looking up information on the internet is certainly no substitute for the experience and training that a typical physician would have acquired. It is also common that such a savvy patient would be more susceptible to medical marketing and influenced by factors other than evidence-based medicine.

Thoughts?

Torture Shock

Nicholas Kristoff had an article in today's Times dealing with the issue of torture in Guatanamo Bay, and specifically with Sami al-Hajj, who is protesting the cruel and extensive abuses he was subjected to while imprisoned. Kristoff writes:

Mr. Hajj cannot bend his knees because of abuse he received soon after his arrest, yet the toilet chair he was prescribed was removed — making it excruciating for him to use the remaining squat toilet. He is allowed a Koran, but his glasses were confiscated so he cannot read it.

All this is inhumane, but also boneheaded. Guantánamo itself does far more damage to American interests than Mr. Hajj could ever do.

To stand against torture and arbitrary detention is not to be squeamish. It is to be civilized.

Torture is a critical issue these days. It has been raised again and again as a question for presidential hopefuls. Though it may be overshadowed now by health care and the economy, no doubt with the media attention that is given to Guatanamo abuses, terrorism have torture have been on people's minds. A poll conducted in December 2006 - January 2007 by Pew Research Center revealed that 12% of respondents think that torture in order to gain vital information is often justified, 31% feel it is sometimes justified, 25% think it is rarely justified, and 29% think that it is never justified (the remaining 3% were unsure--for all of you math geeks). Additionally, a stunning (but oddly not surprising) 40% of respondents feel that in order to curb terrorism, the public must be willing to relinquish some civil liberties.

In September, The Economist had an entire three-part series on civil liberties, terrorism and torture. They ultimately sided with civil liberties:

Take torture, arguably the hardest case (and the subject of the first article in our series). A famous thought experiment asks what you would do with a terrorist who knew the location of a ticking nuclear bomb. Logic says you would torture one man to save hundreds of thousands of lives, and so you would. But this a fictional dilemma. In the real world, policemen are seldom sure whether the many (not one) suspects they want to torture know of any plot, or how many lives might be at stake. All that is certain is that the logic of the ticking bomb leads down a slippery slope where the state is licensed in the name of the greater good to trample on the hard-won rights of any one and therefore all of its citizens.

I'm actually not going to go into extensive detail on my thoughts, suffice it to say that I tend to side with The Economist's view. I do want to point out one thing, however. The other night I was out with a friend to whom I made a crack about how Rudy Giuliani was virulently pro-torture. My friend could only laugh and comment on how sad it is that such a phrase would come out of my mouth, and that it is possible that someone could be "pro-torture."

In other words, how sad is it that torture is actually a prominent debate today?

Uh oh. Anothere Blog on Smoking

Tyler Cowen points us to an interesting article on "uncommon knowledge" gleaned from the social sciences, including this about the smoking ban:

SMOKING BANS CAN be hazardous to some people's health. A rigorous statistical examination has found that smoking bans increase drunken-driving fatalities. One might expect that a ban on smoking in bars would deter some people from showing up, thereby reducing the number of people driving home drunk. But jurisdictions with smoking bans often border jurisdictions without bans, and some bars may skirt the ban, so that smokers can bypass the ban with extra driving. There is also a large overlap between the smoker and alcoholic populations, which would exacerbate the danger from extra driving. The authors estimate that smoking bans increase fatal drunken-driving accidents by about 13 percent, or about 2.5 such accidents per year for a typical county.

Does this mean "score 1" for the critics of the ban? Not exactly. The article continues by advocating increasing regulation, either by employing a nationwide smoking ban or by coming down harder on drunk driving laws.

I disagree with that assertion, but then again I'm not sure how much credence I put into the study to begin with. It's just something to think about.

Smoker Be Thy Name

How far is the war on smoking going to go?

Offices and restaurants have become no-smoking zones in New York City. But Galila Huff, a chain-smoking restaurateur from the Upper West Side, always thought that when it came to smoking, her apartment was her sanctuary.

But perhaps it is no longer.

Her neighbors, Jonathan Selbin, a class-action lawyer who has honed his skills suing major corporations, and his wife, Jenny Selbin, also a lawyer, are irate over the cigarette smoke that they say seeps from Ms. Huff’s apartment into the common hallway of their building, the elegant Beaux-Arts Ansonia, on Broadway between 73rd and 74th Streets.

Her smoking, they say, makes the hallway smell like “a Las Vegas casino,” and the secondhand smoke is jeopardizing the health of their 4-year-old son, Charlie.

In a lawsuit filed on Thursday, they are demanding that she “cease and desist from causing smoke to enter into the common hallway,” and that she pay punitive damages.

I admit that when states began passing legislation to ban smoking in pubic venues (bars, restaurants, etc.), I was furious. Not because I was personally burdened as a smoker (I had part of an elite class of hipster smokers at the time), but because I felt that if a business could make more money by appealing to a certain group of people, then they should have every right to. That and I didn't think that the ban would be enough of an incentive for smokers to actually quit, but rather would cause more smoking on the streets and in the cold.

Well, it appears as though I was wrong about that and my opinion has since changed. The smoking ban and the increase in taxes have apparently causes a dramatic decline in smoking rates in the United States.

Here are the numbers of cigarettes sold (in billions) in 2006 by Philip Morris:

U.S./Canada: 184
Asia Pacific: 197
Eastern Europe: 229
Western Europe: 242

The decline in U.S. smoking rates is pretty remarkable, both in terms of total percentages (42.4 percent of Americans smoked in 1965, versus 20.8 percent in 2006) and the number of cigarettes smoked by people who do smoke (from 19.8 per day in 1974 to 13.9 in 2006).

Still, the slippery slope argument comes into play with legislation like this. When the smoking ban was first enacted in New York, many critics suggested that the legislation would not reduce overall smoking, but rather move smoking to other locations. Consequently, smokers would congregate outside office buildings rather than inside. The argument goes that smoking would eventually be banned outside and confined to personal homes. But now with this the aforementioned lawsuit, even smoking in the privacy of personal homes is in question, as Ms Huff ( cool name for a smoker?) is facing punitive damages for endangering a child in a neighboring apartment.

I want to try and have those who read this blog actually put forth an opinion about this one. What do you think about
a) The smoking ban
b) Tax on cigarettes
c) Suing someone for smoking in his or her home.

Gyoza-San

Over the past week Japan has been rocked by a wave of nearly 500 illnesses directly caused by tainted 'gyoza' from China. For those not familiar, gyoza is a Chinese style of cooking dumplings that is a wildly popular staple in Japan--it also happens to be one of my favorite foods here, hence why the children I teach call me "Gyoza-san".

I am personally upset that I won't be able to stuff myself on my favorite bite-sized salty snack. I am equally disconcerted at both the magnitude of the tainted gyoza's impact (nearly 500 people in 38 of Japan's 50 prefectures) and the preliminary findings as to its possible cause (from the Japan Times):

The head of the Chinese delegation in Japan for talks over recent food poisonings said Wednesday he believes the Chinese-made frozen "gyoza" dumplings were deliberately tainted with pesticide after being shipped from the factory and not during the production process.

Speaking at a joint news conference with the Japanese side in Tokyo, Li Chunfeng stressed that Tianyang Food's factory in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province — where the tainted dumplings were made — has strict and thorough quality control measures that made it almost impossible to mix the toxic substance there.

"I believe that the incident did not stem from structural problems but rather is a specific case," Li, vice director of China's Import and Export Food Safety Bureau at the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, said after morning talks with the Japanese officials."

This has sparked wide-spread mistrust of not only gyoza but of foods imported from China on a whole. Aside from the ramifications for the Japanese company responsible for importing and distributing the gyoza, this new gaff in the world of Chinese exports further shatters the credibility of its products and producers in the minds of consumers around the world (now, in Japan despite assurance of this being a 'specific case' apart from 'structural problems').

Looks like, I'll have to wait a while before I dig in again.

A Flag By Any Other Name

What's in a flag? Apparently, a lot. I suppose the accoutrement of any new autonomous (?) state is a national symbol that the people can be proud of. Instead, the unveiling of the interim flag of Iraq visibly highlights some of the country's most pressing concerns.

Most striking is the decision to retain "Allah Akbar" as the centerpiece of the flag, in a script different from Saddam Hussein's supposedly original handwriting. This is not a problem at first glance--the majority of Iraq's population is Muslim and the flag should represent fundamental commonalities shared by the citizens that live under it. The intention to show that the various sects within the country share common bonds of unity, however, is completely overshadowed by tangible and horrifying sectarian conflict. The flag is a fantastic gesture, but ending conflicts might take more than just a piece of cloth--however, it is be a great start.

Many Iraqis are enraged by the change. Citing that the old flag was not a symbol of Saddam at all, score of protesting Iraqis throughout the country insist that it was one that thousands of citizen soldiers died for in patriotic wars. Municipalities have already pledged not to fly the new flag as citizens attach the old flag to their cars and houses. This protest, however, reminds me of the persistence of many states in the American south that continue to take pride in use of the Confederate flag. Just as the Confederate flag unquestionably represents a past marred by slave holding and racism by consensus, so does Saddam's handwritten script represent his once paternal dominance as does the three stars of the Ba'ath tripartite slogan "Unity, Freedom, and Socialism" remind the world (and the Iraqi people) of the hypocrisy behind the thinly veiled one party authoritarian rule.

Furthermore, Kurdish members of parliament (MP, MP's, MsP, M'sP... dear me) who pushed the initiative to change the flag are upset that the color yellow, representing the Kurdish population, was not added. Even on the simple but crucial level of palette choice, the flag fails to represent a sizable portion of the population who called for its ratification in the first place.

There is no doubt that creating a new flag is an important symbolic step. However, the new Iraqi flag is as tenuous and insecure as the nation it represents. It should prove extremely difficult to find a new national symbol that can sum up the values of the new nation whilst pleasing everyone.

On the purely aesthetic side...

Courtesy of a link through Tyler Cowen's Blog, I checked to see how the new flag fared on one completely unscientific ranking of world flags. It hasn't been updated yet, but I think through a purely artistic lens, losing the stars might place the new flag somewhere between Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda.

Brad Delong is Upset

Wow. Brad Delong is officially pissed about the Bush budget proposal.

Now that we have an actual Bush administration proposal in print--one that Republican senator Judd Gregg doesn't think much of--it is time for an accountability moment. The Bush administration and its flacks and flunkies have long promised that the administration was going to "cut the deficit in half" by the time in left office in fisal 2009. The press by and large reported this straight--not pointing out that the "cut in half" was from a highballed projected peak deficit number that was artificially inflated in order to set the bar artificially low, not pointing out that such a deficit still left fiscal policy far from where it ought to be, and not pointing out that the Bushies' policies would produce such a reduction only if everything broke right and we had four uninterrupted years of macroeconomic good news. Republican economists who cared more about pleasing White House communications than in informing their audience chimed in--why, I get 100 hits on Google for Greg Mankiw saying both when he was under and since he came out from under message discipline that George W. Bush's proposals were projected to reduce the deficit by half by 2009 http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=mankiw+%22the+deficit+in+half%22&btnG=Search. Not under any projection that I would recognize as straight.

Need I say more?

Note: I implore all readers of this blog (all 10 of you?) to go read Delong's entire post on this. I don't think I've ever read something he has written where he has been this angry. It's worth five minutes of your time--hell it's worth fifteen.

Super Brawl for Smash Brothers

With the release of Nintendo's Super Smash Bros. Brawl for the Wii comes massive supply shortages not only in its domestic market but also in foreign markets for the version still in Japanese. Supply shortages? I'm not an expert on video game production, but a good strategy for brewing demand immediately comes to mind.

For the record I have played the game here in Japan and it is fantastic. Also, it doesn't come out in the states till mid-March (jealousy from friends across the Pacific ensues).

Just a small dose of nerdery to keep sane.

I Must Have This...

The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships

Anybody who has known me for even five minutes likely knows my intense and unyielding passion for robots. They are also likely to know my theories on the impending robot wars, as well as my speculation on whether humans and robots will ever get along. And yet I have not read this book...

Check out the wonderful description:

Using examples drawn from around the world, David Levy shows how automata have evolved from the mechanical marvels of centuries past to the electronic androids of the modern age, and how human interactions with technology have changed over the years. Along the way, Levy explores many aspects of human relationships—the reasons we fall in love, why we form emotional attachments to animals and to virtual pets such as the Tamagotchi, and why these same attachments could extend to love for robots. He also examines the needs we seek to fulfill through sexual relationships, tracking the development of life-sized dolls, machines, and other sexual devices, and demonstrating how society's ideas about what constitutes normal sex have changed—and will continue to change—as sexual technology becomes increasingly sophisticated.

I'm really interested in this thesis and would love to read this book. Someone buy it for me.

Also, here is another great book about robots that fascinated me.

Like Andrew Carnegie Walking Through the Factory...

Is society experiencing a change in social attitudes that transcends the interests of private corporations? Are businesses adapting with the growing concerns (environmental, disparities, etc.) of the lower and middle class Americans, and fostering a new era of "gentler capitalism?" This article in the LA Times seems to think so.

I'm not even going to attempt to share my thoughts on this since they would not even come close to the eloquence of Mark Thoma's words:

To the extent that there is a big change happening, it seems to me that the shifts in the past described above were driven in large part by economics, e.g. corporations giving in or promoting particular legislation to avoid solutions that would be much more costly to them. Thus, it really was concern about the bottom line that was the driving force behind the change. In that respect, you have to wonder how much of today's corporate and philanthropic concern over global warming and and other such issues is really an attempt by corporations to avoid potentially more costly solutions being imposed upon them, or an attempt by the wealthy to avoid a political backlash that would result in much higher tax rates. But, maybe I'm too cynical and there really is a different type of corporation or powerful individual beginning to emerge in response to a shift in social values. In the end, though, count me as skeptical. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I'll believe it when I see it as a general phenomena rather than just through a few high profile cases.

Psychological Economics

Here's another reason why the proposed tax rebates aren't the most efficient way to stimulate the economy:

Changing the way that identical income is described can significantly affect how people spend it. In an experiment I conducted at Harvard with my colleagues Dennis Mak and Lorraine Chen Idson, participants were given a $50 check. They were told that this money came from a faculty member’s research budget, financed indirectly through tuition dollars. Roughly half of the participants had this money described as a “rebate,” whereas the others had it described as a “bonus.” When unexpectedly contacted one week later, participants who got a “rebate” reported spending less than half of what those who got a “bonus” reported spending ($9.55 versus $22.04, respectively).

Consequently, it is more likely that those who receive a tax rebate will actually spend it soon if it is referred to as a "bonus" or "gift" rather than a "rebate." The only thing I don't understand about this is that if the term "rebate" implies earning money back that has already been spent, wouldn't someone be more likely to spend it again (since psychologically it's already spent, might as well blow the money)?

Yet another example of how economists should increasingly take psychology into account--in this case, "framing effects"--when crafting policies. The premise that individuals are all rational decision makers is slowly being overshadowed by the one that we are all victim to our own subconscious.

Bill Clinton: The Genius Jerk

I take back what i said about Bill hurting his wife's campaign. With his constant jabbing, he finally managed to hit a nerve.

South Carolina could have been the worst thing to happen to the Obama camp, because the veil has finally been lifted from the eyes of so many Americans swept up by this "breath of fresh air" campaign". It seems that...oh my god...Obama is black!

Bill Clinton threw the line and Obama took the bait. What was once perceived as a colorblind campaign has become anything but that in the eyes of most Americans. Sure, Obama took South Carolina, but he did it with the black vote. Worst of all, by even engaging the Clinton Machine in this ridiculous race debate, he has finally been pegged as the black candidate.

It's unfortunate, but to a certain extent the bigots are right. The idiots among them now equate Obama with Al Sharpton, but the smarter ones realize that if Obama is the next president, Al Sharpton is going to be the first one knocking on his door. Deep down, most Americans are still racist, so for Obama it's a conundrum that he can't possibly avoid, and it's a shame too.

Time will tell if Bill Clinton's strategy pays off, but the most crucial X-factor in US elections seems to be the fragile (fickle?) American psyche, and South Carolina has likely thrown it out of whack for many Obama supporters.

Good News For Obama?

John Edwards and Rudolph Giuliani have officially backed out of the race for the presidency. It is pretty clear that McCain is leading in the Republican nomination and he is also likely to receive Giuliani's voters following his public endorsement. But, for the Democrats the benefactor is a little more ambiguous. Does Edwards' departure mean good news for Obama or Clinton?

Personally, I think it will be Obama. Edwards voters--or those who favored his brand of liberal populism--are more likely to be attracted to a candidate that is emblematic of change (Obama) rather than one who we've essentially already seen in the White House (Clinton). Will these votes be enough to land Obama the Democratic nomination? Time will tell, but I think not.

Assorted Fun Links

"Depressed Candidate Runs Attack Ad on Himself"

"Economic Stimulus Package on Its Way"

"Ray Hits His Stride" (one of the better Achewoods I've read in a while)

"Decorate thine façade with resplendent self-seriousness: 18 particularly ridiculous prog-rock album covers" (I really like number 2)

On the Effectiveness of Tax Rebates

A paper by David S. Johnson, Jonathan A. Parker, and Nicholas S. Souleles argues that tax rebates (like the ones being proposed in the current bipartisan stimulus package) are effective in boosting household expenditure and increasing aggregate demand. Here's the abstract:

During 2001, most U.S. taxpayers were mailed a Federal tax rebate in a randomly assigned week between July and September. Using special questions added to the Consumer Expenditure Survey, we use this historically unique experiment to measure the change in consumption expenditures caused by receipt of the rebate and to test the Permanent Income Hypothesis and related models. Households spent about 20-40 percent of their rebates on non-durable goods during the three-month period in which they received their rebates, and roughly two-thirds of
their rebates cumulatively during the quarter of receipt and subsequent three-month period. The implied effects on aggregate consumption demand are substantial. Responses are larger for households with low liquid wealth or low income, consistent with liquidity constraints.

I haven't read through the entirety of the paper or attempted to comprehend its methodology, but I can say that if we're going to use the 2001 rebate example as a model for the stimulus package, we need to take into account the fact that, even as the article mentions, families with lower-incomes respond greater to the benefits. Intuitively, this makes sense, as those with lower-incomes would need to spend more, hence providing those households with the most financial aid (as the Democrats initially intended) would have been wiser. Here's Paul Krugman on the subject:

The goal of a stimulus plan should be to support overall spending, so as to avert or limit the depth of a recession. If the money the government lays out doesn’t get spent — if it just gets added to people’s bank accounts or used to pay off debts — the plan will have failed.

And sending checks to people in good financial shape does little or nothing to increase overall spending. People who have good incomes, good credit and secure employment make spending decisions based on their long-term earning power rather than the size of their latest paycheck. Give such people a few hundred extra dollars, and they’ll just put it in the bank.

In fact, that appears to be what mainly happened to the tax rebates affluent Americans received during the last recession in 2001.

And there's this from his blog:

I’d guess that the top two quintiles are unlikely to be liquidity-constrained, so the rebate will have little effect on their spending. But they get 58% of the money. The bottom two quintiles, which are the place you’d most expect to have an impact, get only 21% of the money. Split the difference on the middle quintile, and you’ve got a plan where around 2/3 of the outlay is likely to be ineffective.

The bottom line is simply this: economists seem to be in virtual agreement that the stimulus package will do something to ease the projected economic recession, though they are not harmonious as to what. I personally take Krugman's side in thinking that it is a little bit better than nothing, but not nearly as efficient as it could have been had it been geared more towards the economically disadvantaged.

Bad, Bad Capitalist!

And just when you thought that the biggest textbook controversy on the block was in Japan's interpretation of it's wartime past, research brings to light interesting portrayals of capitalism in French and German texts.

Even more fuel for the fire comes in the form of pinpointing massive economic wrong doings on individual ‘baddies’ like Jerome Kerviel at Société Générale. Being a nationalized bank, the losses Société Générale of course have important social consequences. Fortunately for the textbook makers, those can blamed on the terror that greedy individuals can bring upon organs of the State with their greedy, greed-doing (instead of a more scrutinizing state-run regulatory system with their preventative measures in order).

Meet the Clintons

Here's a good op-ed piece from today's New York Times that argues against the sort of "plural presidency" that is likely to occur if Hillary Clinton wins the election:

We have seen in this campaign how former President Clinton rushes to the defense of presidential candidate Clinton. Will that pattern of protection be continued into the new presidency, with not only his defending her but also her defending whatever he might do in his energetic way while she’s in office? It seems likely. And at a time when we should be trying to return to the single-executive system the Constitution prescribes, it does not seem to be a good idea to put another co-president in the White House.

Garry Wills makes a pretty reasonable point here. He cites that one of the major problems of the Bush administration was that many members of the executive essentialy ran their own campaign, pointing specifically to Vice Presiden Dick Cheney heading his own intelligence and military operations. And we have already former President Clinton's appearance in the political scene, politicizing on the behalf of Hillary while simultaenously denouncing the Obama campaign (see earlier blog post here). It has pretty much become common knowledge that many Democrats favor Hillary Clinton because her presidency essentialy entails a package deal. If this is the kind of activity we can expect, then to say the least it would be quite an annoying four years.

The question remains, however, whether we should really expect this. Yes, a victory for Mrs. Clinton will mean that Bill will be poking his head around and influencing the political scene much more than he has been in recent years (recall how Mr. Clinton was actually seeking the nomination for UN Secretary General to follow Kofi Annan). But, I do not think that he will by any means running the sort of secret Cheney-like intelligence operations that Willis had in mind, nor do I think he would be undermining or polarizing the presidency. True, Mr. Clinton's resurgence has left me less-than-enthusiastic, which is not to say that I feel any better about Mrs. Clinton in the White House--but my point is that I do not think we have to worry about a "plural presidency" just yet.

Goths in the News

It's been a reasonably big week for the Goth community in the news (that is, the subculture and not the East Germanic tribes in the 3rd and 4th centuries). Today's New York Times reported a story about a Goth couple that had pulled an old fashioned heist that was "so large and brazen that even law enforcement officials admit some admiration for it." The interesting thing about this is that apparently the couple, that the article referred to as the "Goth Bonnie and Clyde for their love of fantasy role-playing games and vampire novels" were hailed as heroes, scoring points for the working man.

Here's another story about a Goth couple causing trouble in the UK. The couple, which consisted of one who led the other around with a dog collar and chain, was stopped from boarding a public bus. Civil rights issue, anyone? Now, what's funny about this one is that the idea for the leash was the girl's, who claimed that it was emblematic of their trust. The carrier's story is that she is very "animal like" and "kind of a pet."

I'm all for civil rights. If people want to walk around chaining their girlfriends, that's fine by me. My problem is with their rationalizations. It suggests to me that they were doing nothing more than trying to "push the envelope" within an existing stereotype that was becoming all to trendy. But, maybe that's just me never needing anyone to display their trust to me so blatantly.